Switching from 3.5e to Pathfinder

[Yora]

I'm seriously considering switching to Pathfinder. But I don't want to read through the whole book of which I already now 90% of the content and probably miss half of the changes, to make an informed compairision.

Where can I find a mostly complete list of what all changes when switching to Pathfinder?

[Kilbourne]

There's a conversion guide available for free on the Paizo site, and I think that Saph made a guide as well.

[Curious]

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136890 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136890 )

Obligatory link.

For a quick rundown of some minor changes you might miss; combat manuevers all use one unified roll, xp tables are different, crafting no longer burns xp. Quite a few feats and such are also changed, but you have to take those on a case by case basis, for the most part. The skill system has been condensed, so that instead of 'Spot', 'Listen', and 'Search' checks, there is only 'Perception'.

Edit: Oh yeah! And energy drain attacks no longer take away a level; instead, they give you a 'negative level' which gives you some penalties, but which you can make saving throws against.

[Arutema]

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136890 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136890 )

Obligatory link.


One thing missing from the link, and an important change is that it's harder to die at low levels in PF.

Death now occurs when your negative HP exceeds your Con score. Stabilization is now a Con check instead of a flat 10%. The DC is 10+your current negative HP.

Cure Minor Wounds is replaced with the Stabilize spell, which is Range: close instead of Range: touch.

[PinkysBrain]

Basically PF is 3e with martial damage boosted, a cleric with a very poor spell list at low/mid level and no more stacking divine favor/power, and a very curious way of "fixing" casters (rewrite some SoD/SoS spells, but leave enough in which still work ... and then give the casters extra class abilities, also PF persistent/bouncing spell is OMG retarded). Also they have the annoying habit to write almost exclusively trap options, with 1 decent "choice". (Mobile fighter vs. every other kind of melee fighter, claws on eidolons vs all other potential natural weapons it can get, Druid large cat animal companion vs. all the other potential animal companions).

They also forgot all the lessons learned from some of the more popular splat in 3e ... XPH, ToB, MiC.

I'd use at least MiC with PF (with houseruled belt of battle to give standard/full attack, rather than standard/fullround actions and without circlet of rapid casting). PF classes are very much designed in the 3e way, non casters have little flexibility ... they need magic items for that, but in PF anything halfway decent is hugely expensive (just like in 3e core). Also give the cleric some good 3.5 spells.

Pure PF is a downgrade.

[Curious]

Basically PF is 3e with martial damage boosted, a cleric with a very poor spell list at low/mid level and no more stacking divine favor/power, and a very curious way of "fixing" casters (rewrite some SoD/SoS spells, but leave enough in which still work ... and then give the casters extra class abilities, also PF persistent/bouncing spell is OMG retarded). Also they have the annoying habit to write almost exclusively trap options, with 1 decent "choice". (Mobile fighter vs. every other kind of melee fighter, claws on eidolons vs all other potential natural weapons it can get, Druid large cat animal companion vs. all the other potential animal companions).

They also forgot all the lessons learned from some of the more popular splat in 3e ... XPH, ToB, MiC.

I'd use at least MiC with PF (with houseruled belt of battle to give standard/full attack, rather than standard/fullround actions and without circlet of rapid casting). PF classes are very much designed in the 3e way, non casters have little flexibility ... they need magic items for that, but in PF anything halfway decent is hugely expensive (just like in 3e core). Also give the cleric some good 3.5 spells.

Pure PF is a downgrade.

:smallconfused:
:smallsigh:

No. No it is not. The extra class abilities that were given to the casters are almost universally small and insignificant compared to being able to full cast in the first place, and only serve to widen the options available at any time, for the better. Most of the really offensive spells, such as polymorph, have been nerfed. It is certainly still possible to play the tier 1 spellcaster, but in any 3.x edition that is going to be possible, so it's not really that remarkable. Any eidolon is effective, so I'm not certain where you get the idea that only claws were a viable option. The archetypes are also not restricted solely to the mobile fighter, there are plenty of other good options- e.g. the dawnflower dervish, two-handed warrior, two-weapon fighter, weapon master. Yes, the free-handed fighter and savage fighter aren't very good, but those are only two out of more than a dozen.

Pathfinder core is in no way a downgrade, it is certainly better balanced, and a lot more fun than 3.5 core, or even 3.5 with a plenty of splat books.

[PinkysBrain]

Claws are the only thing which can trigger rend, which is a big deal with high strength. You might want one stinger for poison, but for the rest it's claws all the way ... comes with free hands as well, which adds flexibility (pincers lose the hands).

The dawnflower dervish is just a regional variant of the mobile fighter ... the rest will get their ass handed to them. Iteratives and haste extra attack going unused each time you have to go more than 5 feet is huge.

I said PF pure is a downgrade, as PF with PF splat only ... vs 3.5 with splat.

[Curious]

Iteratives and haste extra attack going unused each time you have to go more than 5 feet is huge.


I'm sorry, where does this rule exist? Your wording isn't very clear.

For eidolons, there are plenty of other options, such as the centaur buid, or any of the other dozen options. Just look through the handbook on this very site. Just because you choose to pigeonhole yourself doesn't mean there are no other options.

There are plenty of good archetypes, such as the polearm fighter, which allows you to attack enemies within five feet when wielding a reach weapon, and doubles the weapon training bonus on attacks of opportunity. Or the two-weapon fighter, which allows you to get two attacks on your standard action attacks.

Pathfinder isn't any worse than 3.5, and is better in a lot of ways. Combat maneuvers in particular I like, seeing as they are so simplified now.

[Blisstake]

-Yora

I'm not exactly sure what you're looking for, but the link posted earlier has many of the important changes, and if you're looking for anything specific, check out the SRD. (http://d20pfsrd.com/)

Can we not turn this into a PF vs 3.5 debate?

[Curious]

Er, sorry, you have a good point. I'll retreat from this thread to avoid further flames.

[Infernalbargain]

One important point is that cantrips are at-will abilities now, hence the removal of cure minor wounds.

One important thing for GMing is that natural attacks have been changed. Whether something is a primary or secondary natural attack is determined strictly by what kind of attack it is (exceptions explicitly mentioned of course). So all claw attacks are primary attacks and all tail attacks are secondary. None of this whichever is listed first issues.

Major point for rogues is that plants, undead, and constructs are now vulnerable to sneak attack and crits.

Spont casters no longer need to burn an additional feat to make quicken work.

For casters, look at all the spells that you remember being extremely good, chances are they got changed and the rest really weren't touched.

Oh yeah, read through the monster traits.

[McSmack]

Obviously there's arguments on both sides of the aisle about PF. From my experience both DMing and playing PF vs 3.5, I like it. The core and APG give a fair amount of options, though obviously not as many as the heaping mountain of 3.5 splat material. There was some nerfing of casters mostly correcting some of the broken spells from 3.5.

Feats every two levels instead of three.

Increased hit die for bards, rogues and rangers.

New and better class options to fill in some of the 'dead levels' on each class.

The cleric's channel energy means a cleric has to worry less about saving spell slots for healing or carrying around a bag full of CLW wands.

Sorcerer bloodlines add more customization and flavor to that class.

Lots of nice things for everyone.

[PinkysBrain]

I'm sorry, where does this rule exist?
Full attack is a full round action, so the non mobile fighters who have to move more than a 5 foot step don't get iterative attacks or the extra attack from haste.

For eidolons, there are plenty of other options, such as the centaur buid, or any of the other dozen options. Just look through the handbook on this very site. Just because you choose to pigeonhole yourself doesn't mean there are no other options.
I prefer balanced options. The killer centaur is a case in point of the usefulness of claws, which I guess you realised :)

There are plenty of good archetypes, such as the polearm fighter, which allows you to attack enemies within five feet when wielding a reach weapon, and doubles the weapon training bonus on attacks of opportunity. Or the two-weapon fighter, which allows you to get two attacks on your standard action attacks.
Very limited compared to mobile fighter, relying on people to walk past you for AoOs is unreliable at higher levels. The mobile fighter with TWF and haste will get 2 attacks AND iteratives.

PS. I don't hate PF, I think it's an improvement on 3e core ... it's that they have this huge NIH syndrome for every innovation which came after core in 3e. They have gone back to basics and have to relearn it all over again ... and they like trap options too much and Vital Strike is a joke.